Sign in
South Africa Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

South Africa Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
2 court collections
Last checked

South Africa decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Family And Children [2024] ZAGPJHC 1003

F.B v J.B (2023/01363)

F.B v J.B (2023/01363) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1003 (25 September 2024)

Rule 43 maintenance and costs application: the court awarded interim maintenance of R65,000 monthly and a contribution toward legal costs.

  • Maintenance Pendente Lite
  • Contribution To Costs
  • Rule 43 Procedure
  • Quantification Of Needs
  • Reciprocal Duty Of Support
  • Rule-43
Read case analysis
Family And Children [2020] ZALMPPHC 80

S.S.B v M.S (HCA02/2020)

S.S.B v M.S (HCA02/2020) [2020] ZALMPPHC 80 (18 September 2020)

The High Court found that the Magistrate erred in quantifying the maintenance amount and in treating grocery and therapy expenses as future needs. The evidence showed that the minor child's monthly needs, including food, groceries, therapy, and other essentials, amounted to R6,850, and the respondent had the means to pay more than the ordered R1,500. The respondent's own testimony indicated he sometimes paid up to R2,500 monthly. The court held that grocery expenses are immediate needs and therapy costs were understated in the original order. The best interests of the child require adequate m…

  • Child Maintenance
  • Best Interests Of Child
  • Maintenance Act
  • Parental Responsibility
  • Quantification Of Needs
Read case analysis
Family And Children [2020] ZALMPPHC 87

B[....] v S[....] (HCA02/2020)

B[....] v S[....] (HCA02/2020) [2020] ZALMPPHC 87 (18 September 2020)

The court found that the maintenance amount of R1500 per month was inadequate given the undisputed needs of the minor child, which included therapy at R2000 per month and groceries. The respondent's own evidence indicated he was capable of paying more than the ordered amount. The Magistrate erred in treating grocery expenses as a future need and in underestimating therapy costs. The best interests of the child require that maintenance be sufficient to cover all reasonable needs, and both parents must contribute according to their means. The appeal was upheld, and the maintenance order was inc…

  • Child Maintenance
  • Best Interests Of Child
  • Maintenance Act
  • Parental Responsibility
  • Quantification Of Needs
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

South Africa decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.